Court sets aside Form F enquiry, remands for proper assessment. Failure to conduct fair enquiry leads to quashed orders.

The court partially allowed the writ petition, setting aside the enquiry into the Form F declaration and remanding the matter for a proper examination by the third respondent. The judge emphasized the need for a fair and reasonable assessment, citing precedents requiring thorough consideration of Form F and any additional evidence provided. The court found the respondent's failure to conduct a proper enquiry resulted in an erroneous order, leading to the quashing of the impugned orders. The case was remanded for a correct assessment without awarding costs.

---

---

Issues involved:
Challenge to assessment order under Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 for the year 2002-03; Finality attached to Form F declaration.

Analysis:
The petitioner contested an assessment order under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 for the year 2002-03, focusing on the finality attached to the Form F declaration. The petitioner argued that the third respondent erred in disallowing the exemption claim based on the relationship between the petitioner and third parties, emphasizing that once Form F is filed, exemption must be granted. This contention was supported by legal precedents from various courts, including the Supreme Court. The judge referred to a similar case involving Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd., where the assessing officer's failure to consider the Form F declaration led to a misdirected conclusion regarding an inter-state sale. The judge highlighted the Supreme Court's guidance on the type of enquiry required when a Form F declaration is filed, emphasizing the need for a fair and reasonable assessment by the authority. The absence of any enquiry in the present case led the judge to reject the conclusion of an inter-state sale.

The judgment also referenced a previous decision by the Division Bench of the Court, emphasizing that the enquiry under Section 6A(2) of the CST Act should focus on verifying the truth of the particulars in Form F and considering any additional evidence provided by the dealer. The judge noted that a proper enquiry by the Assessing Officer could reveal whether the transaction was a consignment sale or an inter-state sale. Additionally, a certificate obtained by the petitioner from the Assistant Commissioner was highlighted as crucial evidence that should be considered during the enquiry process. The judge concluded that the respondent's failure to conduct a proper enquiry resulted in an erroneous order, warranting the quashing of the impugned orders and remanding the matter for a correct assessment.

In response to the government advocate's mention of other issues in the impugned order, the petitioner's counsel clarified that the writ petition was solely concerned with the scope of enquiry on the Form F declaration. Consequently, the judge partly allowed the writ petition, setting aside the enquiry into the Form F declaration and remanding the matter to the third respondent for a proper examination and a speaking order on merits and in accordance with the law. No costs were awarded, and the connected miscellaneous petition was closed.

---